中樞神經抑制劑的使用與謀殺案件關聯性之研究

Abstract

總論： 殺人乃不法戕害生命之行為，從而刑法之保護的個人法益，亦以殺人罪居首。本研究旨在利用遭殺害遺體之解剖報告內容，經蒐集及統計其體液內中樞神經抑制劑的濃度與種類，並進一步加以分析，研究此類毒藥物與死亡間的各種關聯性。希望進一步分析被害者遭加工後殺害之比例及殺害者使用目的，希望能對司法及衛生單位更多參考資訊，從而避免下一例類似手法的死亡！ 研究方法與步驟： 本研究共蒐集八年多以來（民國九十五年以後，截至一百零二年五月份為止），個人(夏股)報請法務部法醫研究所行司法解剖鑑定案件，共五百七十一例」，其中經解剖再經司法調查為「他殺」或「可疑為他殺」的案件進行回溯性的分析及統計，得到初步數據後，再進一步就其殺害手法、動機、藥物種類、濃度對死因的影響進行分析。經分析解剖報告，並整理彙整其中有關死因、藥毒物濃度檢測結果及病理解剖報告精要，再進一步與其他非他殺案件進行比較，得到他殺案件與非他殺案件之死者體液中中樞神經抑制劑與死因之相關比較與分析，並試圖衍繹出中樞神經抑制劑對殺害手法有無加工效果或加重其加害意圖。 結果： 研究總案件共計571件，經鑑定出使用中樞神經抑制劑者計252件。自然死中有31.8 %（67/211）、意外死人口中46.8 %（81/173）、遭殺害者中有41.8 %（23/56）、自殺人口中61.5 %（56/91），在未確定死亡方式人口的血液內發現中樞神經抑制劑者佔62.5 %（25/40）。血液內有發現酒精混合使用鎮靜安眠藥者分別為：直系血親組（50%）、朋友組（38.7%）、陌生人組（10%）。另外，直系親屬組中有30%遭受暴力型殺害，朋友組中有84.6%遭受暴力型殺害，陌生人組則有75%遭受暴力型殺害。 結論： 陌生者殺人大多起於臨時起意，酒後互起爭執進而發生兇殺案件，這類案件通常手法多樣化，且不一定有中樞神經抑制劑使用。但對於殺害直系尊親屬、子女類型案件，其殺人手法看似單純，諸如燒炭、餵食藥物，但有高比例的中樞神經抑制劑混合使用發現，這也讓調查人員面臨更嚴苛的調查環境，而法醫人員對於這一類型的案件就必須更為審慎，否則動輒影響個人、社會甚至是國家法益，對社會情感影響深刻!

Introduction： It is an illegal act to deprive or murder other’s life, so the crime of homicide is of utmost importance in criminal law to ensure personal legal interest. I collected the Forensic autopsy reports of homicide victims and tried to analyze the concentration and types of CNS inhibitors in toxicological results. Furthermore, I also analyzed the correlations between the CNS inhibitors and death. From the analysis of the ratio of CNS inhibitors used in homicide victims and the purpose of the perpetrator, I hope to provide more useful information to both the judicial and Hygienic branches of government, thus preventing the reoccurrence of similar death. Steps and methods I collected 571 cases performed forensic autopsy and reported to the Institute of Forensic Medicine, Dept of Justice from 2006 to May, 2013 from my working experience. After requiring the initial statistics from cases that are regarded as “homicide” or “possible homicide” by judicial investigation, I analyze the methods and motivations of the crime, and the influence of types and concentration of CNS inhibitors to the cause of death. I further analyze the contribution of the concentration of CNS inhibitors to the cause of death after studying the autopsy reports. I also compare the difference of the relation between CNS inhibitors and the cause of death among homicide and non-homicide groups to determine whether the CNS inhibitors are an aid to homicide or just an aggravation to the intent. Result ： There were 252 cases indentified as using CNS inhibitors in the aforementioned 571cases after detailed forensic autopsy. The ratio in every cause of death is as follows: 31.8% in the natural death（n=211）, 46.8% in the accidental death （n=173）, 46.43% in homicide victims （n=56）,61.5% in the suicide death（n=91）, and 62.5% in undetermined（n=40）. On the other hand, when studying the relation between the murderer and the victim, the percentage of using hypnotic sedative drugs with ethanol at the same time is 50%（5/10） in parricide , 38.7% （5/13）in acquaintances , and 10%（3/20） in strangers. When concerning whether violence was also used, there are 30% （3/10）in parricide, 84.6%（11/13） in acquaintances, and 75% （15/20）in strangers . Conclusion： Murder by strangers mostly resulted from impulse such as dispute after drinking. The methods in the scenario are often diversified and not necessarily including the use of CNS inhibitor. However, cases such as parricide or murder conducted by relatives, CNS inhibitors are often used and concealed by other more apparent factors such as burned charcoal or medication to mislead investigation. Therefore, forensic investigators have to be more cautious and perceptive in these cases because it not only concerns the interests of specific individuals, but the social perception and believe in justice.